February 12, 2019 at 15:31 #1397257
Fair point, Jack. What puzzles me is if EF was expected to be so virulent that the BHA felt it would spread like wildfire even among vaccinated horses (it hasn’t) and the IHRB felt it necessary to rule that a horse must have had an injection within 2 months to run (didn’t hear Irish trainers complaining) then why now has the BHA said 6 months? The 4 months difference is surely an admission by the authorities that they were wrong about the spread. Therefore, would it have been any significant greater risk for the BHA to say 9 months and thus save trainers and fans from yet more interruption.February 12, 2019 at 16:11 #1397262
- Total Posts 2504
They advised the booster in January.
Seems like many trainers ignored it and I’m surprised so many have horses whose vaccinations were administered over six months ago. I would have thought a ‘ booster ‘ would be more effective in late October / November ?February 12, 2019 at 17:24 #1397268
It was advised in January, Mark, and last week but as one trainer said “if my horse is fit and in form why would I administer something not mandatory”. Most Jumps horses have their vaccinations when put out to grass in late May/June. 9 months would have seen these horses able to run now, although in fairness not for long! What gets me is Dunshea saying:
“The reasoning behind this [the six-month stipulation] is that it will increase the level of immunity,” Dunshea said, “by ensuring that vaccinations are current to mitigate the chance of horses picking up the virus.”
But it is patently clear that 99.9% of tested horses, even those who ran at Ayr, have not picked up the virus at a time when their immunity level is not as strong as it might be and quite ‘weak’ in many cases!February 12, 2019 at 18:40 #1397274
- Total Posts 2504
All I’ll add is this :
1) There must be a reason Paul Nicholls has two vaccination periods a season
2) Maybe this will improve horse welfare, trainer performances and public awareness.
I’m constantly at odds with the BHA but I think this will end well for everyone.February 12, 2019 at 19:07 #1397278
For those who can access it, Julian Muscat puts it better than I can:
Aussies rarely admit they were wrong!February 12, 2019 at 19:20 #1397281
- Total Posts 2153
“Historically, equine influenza vaccines have been administered at intervals as short as 3 months to horses considered at high risk of infection. All currently marketed equine influenza vaccines are likely to provide protection of at least six months duration. This is true for both of the modified live vaccines on the market today, and for inactivated vaccines. This performance depends on the quality of currently marketed vaccines, and maintaining this performance will depend on the inclusion of any new antigenically distinct equine influenza viruses that may appear in the horse population in the future.”
“Influenza is endemic in the equine population of the United States and throughout much of the world, with the notable exceptions of New Zealand and Iceland. Australia has also regained its equine influenza-free status after the extensive outbreak of 2007.”
There are three types of equine influenza virus vaccine currently marketed:
Each of these has been shown to be efficacious in providing protection against clinical disease and viral shedding when used appropriately. These vaccines frequently include multiple strains of equine influenza virus A2 representing the major circulating strains; however, none contain strains isolated during the last 5 years. The majority of these vaccines require two-dose priming regimens, although a three-dose priming regimen is recommended here as described below; a 3-dose regimen is required for at least one of the most effective inactivated vaccines. These vaccines are well suited to pre-foaling boosters designed to increase colostral antibody levels against influenza virus.
Modified-live (MLV) cold-adapted equine influenza /A2 vaccine
This product is administered intranasally. The vaccine has proven to be very safe and a single administration to naïve horses is protective for up to 12 months, although only a 6-month claim is made on the product data sheet. Circulating antibody responses in naïve horses post-vaccination are minimal, suggesting that other factors, such as local protection at the nasal mucosa may be enhanced by this vaccine. The product is licensed for vaccination of non-pregnant animals over 11 months of age using a single dose of vaccine, followed by boosters at 6-month intervals. Generally, horses shed vaccinal virus for less than 1 week after vaccination. However, the amount and duration of shed vaccinal virus is so minimal that other horses in contact with them will not be vaccinated. Incorporation of the MLV vaccine into a program that previously used inactivated vaccine can be easily accomplished by substituting the MLV when routine boosters are scheduled.
Experience strongly supports the safety of the MLV intranasal vaccine when administered to foals less than 11 months of age. Similarly, the vaccine is protective when administered to foals six months of age or older. The onset of protection in previously unvaccinated naïve horses has been documented as early as seven days after vaccination. The vaccine is not recommended for vaccination of mares in late pregnancy to boost colostral antibodies, as data available to date suggest that circulating antibody responses to vaccination are low.
Canary pox vector vaccine
This product is to be administered by intra-muscular injection and has been shown to provide protection of at least six months duration. A two dose priming regimen is recommended, with boosters at a six month interval. The vaccine is safe to use in foals as young as four months of age, and there is some evidence of efficacy in the face of maternal immunity. Because this vaccine induces high levels of antibody, it is likely to be suitable for pre-foaling boosters. “February 12, 2019 at 19:55 #1397286
- Total Posts 5545
Very helpful, wit. Thanks
Never argue with a fool. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience, then onlookers might not be able to tell the difference. https://lazybet.com/February 13, 2019 at 01:03 #1397295
- Total Posts 2153
that US link says:
“All equine influenza virus isolates between 2008 and 2014 were H3N8 viruses of the Florida sub-lineage, and comprised two sub-lineages, clades 1 and 2.
The viruses identified in the USA in 2014 were characterized as clade 1 viruses, whereas those detected in France, Germany, Ireland, Sweden and the UK were clade 2 viruses.
Global surveillance is likely insufficient to assure that these geographic restrictions are absolute but it seems likely that the equine influenza viruses circulating in North America are all from Clade 1: i.e. A/South Africa/2003-like or A/Ohio/2003-like.
Because of the antigenic differences between Florida Clade 1 and Clade 2 it is possible that vaccination with only one of these antigens will not fully protect against disease caused by the other. However, at this time there is no evidence of a vaccine failure resulting from this phenomenon.
This means that North American horses vaccinated with a Clade 1 virus, such as A/Ohio/2003-like, should be protected from current circulating North American influenza viruses, but may not be fully protected if they travel overseas, or in the event that Clade 2 viruses are introduced to North America, for example in a horse transported here for competition.
The OIE panel recommended that vaccines contain examples of both Clade 1 (e.g. A/South Africa/2003-like or A/Ohio/2003-like) and Clade 2 (A/Richmond/2007) viruses particularly for horses traveling internationally. ”
The AHT reports that all the identified current GB cases are Clade 1, not the Europe-endemic Clade 2:
So hopefully the current vaccinations are concentrating on the GB-newcomer Clade 1 rather than the longtime Clade 2.
One of the two vaccines named by AHT – ProteqFlu – seems to have Clade 1 antigens:
Cannot immediately find the antigens in the other one (Equip F).
“Vaccines work by ‘teaching’ the immune system (the body’s natural defences) how to defend itself against diseases. When ProteqFlu is given to horses, the animals’ immune system recognises the specific proteins from the equine influenza strains as ‘foreign’ and makes antibodies against them. The immune system will then be able to make those protective antibodies more quickly when the animal is naturally exposed to the equine flu viruses and the tetanus bacterium. This will help to protect against equine influenza. The vaccine also contains an ‘adjuvant’ to stimulate a better response.”February 13, 2019 at 01:08 #1397296
- Total Posts 1217
Easy to aftertime the decisions they made now but had BHA let racing go ahead whilst doing testing and more cases came back positive, the press would have had a field day slating them on why they didn’t act further and suspended racing for a short period.
Damned if you do…….February 13, 2019 at 22:44 #1397345
- Total Posts 33
@BigG Thanks very much for your reply to my query all the way back on page 4 of this thread re why the equine flu outbreak had caused such a strong reaction.
Some of the comments Henrietta Knight has made in the article linked to below summarise what I was thinking rather more eloquently i.e. the reaction seemed to be as if the plague had been unleashed, whereas the flu is a problem that the human population copes with year round.
My terminology “normal flu” was also not very precise! What I was getting at was a flu virus that is not unusually severe in terms of harm to the infected and mortality rates i.e. the type of flu virus that tends to be seen fairly commonly from year to year. That’s not to say it is a minor ailment though, and the more vulnerable members of society are encouraged to vaccinate for good reason.
If there was any evidence that the type of equine flu observed recently was unusually contagious or harmful then I could understand the BHA reaction, though I haven’t seen much that suggests this was so.February 14, 2019 at 00:39 #1397362
- Total Posts 4989
Hi Marlingford, thank goodness racing is back, I was having withdrawls I’m sure. I don’t
disagree with your take on the the situation, or that of Henrietta Knight for that matter.
My original post was in the main was about flu in the human population, in response to your
mention of “normal Flu” and that it is a killer every year without fail. I wasn’t sure about
this equine flu virus, my only mention on that being that if it was on a par with human flu
then it could be serious. Flu every year takes about 600 lives in the UK, and that’s your
common or garden variety. Serious strains are worse. http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/influenza-flu
I don’t know any more than I’ve read about the equine variety, but it seems that vaccinations
keep it to a minimum. Apologies if I was a bit picky about “normal flu” I’m probably a bit
sensitive in that area having nearly lost someone close to me with flu.
Hopefully this scare blows over and no horses fall foul of it. I’ve had my ticket set aside
for some time for Gold Cup day at the festival, and have to admit I was getting a bit worried
that it might not happen. Thankfully it’s full steam ahead nowFebruary 16, 2019 at 18:30 #1397741
Still waiting for news of more positive tests among racehorses. Just saying.February 17, 2019 at 10:18 #1397790
- Total Posts 446
Anyone else think it should be declared to the public if a horse had recently had a flu jab? Kind of like they have to declare wind operations? I think it should be declared as it’s grossly unfair on punters to be unaware they are betting on horses who have recently been vaccinated which really don’t have much chance of winning
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.